Made For Love

Looking Beyond Our Own Interests in Sex I. Introductory Comments a. Sexual orientation is a modern concept that has its roots in the medical literature of the late nineteenth century. Referring categorically to homosexuals, lesbians, or gays in scripture is anachronistic. b. Historians make a mistake in broadening what ancient sources say about specific sexual practices and phenomena as if they apply to what the ancients thought of homosexuality as a whole. c. Consider the following summary of the historical condemnation of heterosexuality in early Modern England by Mario DiGrangi: "In early modern England, heterosexuality was considered a shameful and dangerous practice; it was therefore socially and legally proscribed. Laws and local customs punished those people who engaged in premarital sex, had illegitimate children, or committed adultery. Insults like "whore," "cuckold," and "bastard" reveal the opprobrium attached to heterosexual acts. In sonnet sequences and tragedies, heterosexual relations are often represented as anguished, violent, or politically disastrous affairs, structured around male misogyny and possessiveness, female rebelliousness and duplicity, and an overall impasse of communication between the sexes. The prevalence of cuckoldry jokes in comedies suggests that husbands were unable to satisfy or control their sexually promiscuous wives. Indeed, a variety of discourses held that women were problematic sexual partners for men, and that men were compromised, diminished, or endangered by their passion for women. In the aggregate, these sources indicate that heterosexual relations were highly stigmatized, often led to deviant behavior (including "unnatural," non-procreative, and non-marital sexual acts, destructive jealousy, and even murder), and hence had to be carefully monitored and circumscribed." Cultural Context a. Penetration and disrupting the patriarchal hierarchy i. Sexual penetration of a man was shameful, because it made him feminine ii. The social hierarchy was defined and reinforced by who could penetrate whom a Roman citizen could penetrate a slave or a woman but not another citizen without shaming the one who was penetrated

II.

Copyright 2012 Rev. Darren McDonald. No alterations to these notes may be made without the express written permission of the author.

III.

iii. In this context anal sex could be understood as a way to exert dominance and social control. b. Pederasty i. Pederasty (Greek paiderastia, love for boys) was a social practice, not rooted in biological attraction, in which adolescent boys were initiated into adulthood through the context of a sexual service relationship. In this relationship, they were expected to sexually service their older teacher in exchange for that teachers tutelage (and, I kid you not, role modeling.) ii. In Rome, often the boy was a slave or a freedman (a lower social class) whom it was considered appropriate to use in ways that would have been considered evil if the boy was a citizen. Their consent and shame werent considered. iii. These boys had to avoid signs of aging and were discardable as they aged or as their masters married women. iv. The boy was not allowed pleasure (in fact, it was shameful for him to even want pleasure) v. A critique of pederasty can be understood as a critique of sexual exploitation and abuse. It does not need to be generalized to any and all forms of consensual same sex intercourse Vice Lists as a Literary Tool a. These lists were a common literary device in Hellenistic Judaism and Greek thought b. Paul uses them as examples of the expectation of community life in the communities that Paul oversaw c. They illustrate Pauls division between life by the flesh and life by the Spirit. d. They may have served a role similar to catchesis (formula instruction within the religious community) in Pauls communities

1 Corinthians 6:7-11
Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? 8 On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren. 9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God ? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor malakos, nor arsenokoits, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

Context within 1 Corinthians: Paul is instructing believers to act like those ruled by God (inheritors of the kingdom, those serving Gods reign) rather than running to non-believers to have their problems solved in a way unshaped by their belief (through civil litigation). Saying they will not inherit the kingdom isnt a threat that they might lose salvation but a challenge for them to live under Gods rule. 1 Timothy 1:10
As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus so that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, 4 nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith. 5 But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6 For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion, 7 wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions. 8 But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers 10 and immoral men and arsenokoits and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,

Context within Timothy: This is meant to be an example of appropriate teaching, emphasizing how the law should be taught as a restraint against violence and immorality. What do malakos and arsenokoits mean? I. These words occur in other places separately, and so they are not likely a technical word pair. (We cant define one simply by defining the other) II. Malakos a. Literally soft one it was a sexist insult meaning effeminate (or perhaps closer to the force of this epithet sissy/prissy) b. This stems from the sexist belief that women were softer and weaker c. This can refer to softness of moral character (laziness, degeneracy, decadence, lack of courage). d. This most often was an insult tossed at heterosexual men. They could be accused of being too effeminate by being too lazy, enjoying too much sex, enjoying luxury and good food, or even refusing to commit suicide. e. Reasons to associate this with pederasty i. Philo and others used this word as an epithet in condemning the prissiness of the boys in pederastic relationships

III.

IV.

ii. Pederasty was the most common sort of homoerotic relationship in the Greco-Roman world and the most criticized by rabbinic sources f. A technical term for bottom (or passive partner) already existed: (kinaedos) Arsenokoits a. Scholars, if they are humble, have to admit we dont really know what this word means. It appears like this is the first use, and its usage is confined to vice lists like this that dont offer much context b. Etymological fallacy i. If we break down the word etymologically, its formed of two word stems that mean man/male and bed. ii. Problem is, words are more than the sum of their parts. (Dale Martin offers several examples: understand; chairman; outhouse) c. Dale Martins contextual analysis suggests that the word likely had connotations of both exploitation/economic abuse and sex i. In Sibylline Oracle 2.70-77.10 , the word shows up in a list of economic sins that makes no other reference to sexuality. Conversely, it does NOT show up in that oracles list of sexual sins. ii. In the second century Acts of John, it shows up in a list relating to stealing and violence without showing up in that documents list of sexual sins iii. Two cases suggest a possible sexual meaning to the term 1. One involves a story in which an evil being tricks Eve into adultery and then claims Adam as a sex slave/boy (putting this in a pederasty context) 2. One 4th century text For more see: http://www.clgs.org/arsenokoit%C3%A9s-and-malakos-meaningsand-consequences

Galatians 5:13-26
13 You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. 14 The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." 15 If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other. 16 So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. 17 For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law. 19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and

witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

I.

II.

Relying on Self or God? a. Paul uses the flesh to refer to what humanity can accomplish on its own. The reference starts with circumcision not the inherent dirtiness of the body (this isnt Gnosticism). The flesh symbolizes self-reliance and life centered on self RATHER than a life centered on God (and through God others b. Theres no reason to read porneia (sexual immorality/fornification as referring to same sex intercourse. It refers literally to prostitution and metaphorically to impure sex. Here, as in 1 Corinthians 7, it is contrasted with self-restraint. c. Compared to selfish sex, selfish spirituality, and harming others to satisfying the self (through drunkenness, violence, and the like), the fruit of the Spirit are grounded in unconditional love and service of the other. d. Notice 5:14s summary of the law as the love of neighbor (as self) and 5:23 s statement that the law cannot oppose the fruit of the Spirit Discsussion: How might our relationships be more reflective of the fruit of the Spirit (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control)?

Countryman, William L. Dirt, Greed, & Sex: Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and Their Implications for Today. 2nd ed. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2003. DiGangi, Mario. The Homoerotics of Early Modern Drama. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 1997. Martin, Dale B. Arsenokoits and Malakos: Meanings and Consequences. [online] http://www.clgs.org/arsenokoit%C3%A9s-and-malakos-meanings-andconsequences. Nissinen, Marti. Homoeroticism in the Biblical World: A Historical Perspective. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2004.

Scroggs, Robin. The New Testament and Homosexuality. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1989.